Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Benjamin E. Cox v. Anthony Hathaway, Iii, Superintendent Frank Lin Freeman, 103 F.3d 116, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    The document is a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It involves a petitioner, Benjamin E. Cox, who sought appeal of a district court's denial of relief on his habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. Therefore, the Fourth Circuit denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the reasoning of the district court.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-12-12 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 103 F.3d 116 Docket: 96-7109

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document is a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It involves a petitioner, Benjamin E. Cox, who sought appeal of a district court's denial of relief on his habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. Therefore, the Fourth Circuit denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the reasoning of the district court.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    2 views2 pages

    Benjamin E. Cox v. Anthony Hathaway, Iii, Superintendent Frank Lin Freeman, 103 F.3d 116, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The document is a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It involves a petitioner, Benjamin E. Cox, who sought appeal of a district court's denial of relief on his habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. Therefore, the Fourth Circuit denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the reasoning of the district court.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    103 F.

    3d 116

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation


    of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
    res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
    service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
    Circuit.
    Benjamin E. COX, Petitioner-Appellant,
    v.
    Anthony HATHAWAY, III, Superintendent; Frank Lin
    Freeman,
    Respondents-Appellees.
    No. 96-7109.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted Nov. 21, 1996.
    Decided Dec. 12, 1996.

    Benjamin E. Cox, Appellant Pro Se. Sharon Coull Wilson, Associate


    Attorney General, Mark John Pletzke, NORTH CAROLINA
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
    E.D.N.C.
    DISMISSED.
    Before HALL, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his petition
    filed under 28 U.S.C. 2254 (1994), amended by Antiterrorism and Effective
    Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub.L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214. We have
    reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the
    recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error.
    Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on
    the reasoning of the district court. Cox v. Hathaway, No. CA-95-952-5-H

    (E.D.N.C. July 11, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts
    and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court
    and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    2

    DISMISSED.

    You might also like